Expected STAR on first contact with London?

[CEJM]

Dear all,

Was talking to a friend who flies for BA about BA mentioning the expected STAR on first contact with London.

BA: London, Shuttle 234, FL340, Expecting Willo 4 Charlie.

According to my friend this was normal procedure when checking in with London. However I have never heard any other airline doing it and have never done it myself. (not saying that BA is wrong, I might be wrong)

Is this required when checking in with London and is there a reference to it?

Thanks

[DTY/LKS]

Some airlines have an agreement to give the STAR on first contact with London to cut down on RT loading when inbound to certain London airfields. ATC will correct it if the wrong STAR is said by the pilot.
British Airways, Midland, Lufthansa, Thomson off the top of my head.

[5milesbaby]

To add to the list is FlyBe on Gatwick or Southampton routes.

It is all part of an ongoing trial to cut down on RTF.

[250 kts]

And the sooner it is brought in for all airlines the better.

If you know your expected STAR then don't hesitate to tell us on first contact-we will appreciate it and advise you if you're not correct or if there is a change. Maybe this way we'll get it introduced as the norm quicker.

[CEJM]

Thank you all for your replies. I have been looking through the books to see if I missed something but obviously not.

I can see how it cuts down on RTF. So from now on I will let you know on first contact what we expect.

Thanks again.

CEJM

[250 kts]

And don't forget to tell the rest of your colleagues

[MikeAlphaTangoTango]

So two years further on, is there any progress on this RT phraseology? I have been using it but was recently questioned by my colleague on the flight deck as to whether I had seen written confirmation allowing it's use. It turns out I have not (thought I had!) or perhaps I've just missed it? CAP413 v20 does not refer to it as far as I can tell.

[Talkdownman]

An expectation is getting 'orribly close to an assumption.
Don't assume (ASS U ME), check.
How about 'Confirm STAR' ?

[MorfArsenal]

Don't mean to go too far off topic, so forgive me.

While it is clearly very much appreciated by radar if the expected STAR is included in the first call, I would really appreciate it if pilots did not include their expected stand on first call when vacating the runway.

When the rt is really busy, the last thing you need is the pilot checking in like this: USA 123 vacating 27L.... Uuummmmm, Goooiinnnggg tooooooooo, uuummmmmmmm 33 uuummm 4.

Often the information given to the pilot is incorrect and extra time is spent giving the correct stand. We have the stand info on the strip and even if we didn't, hearing it from the pilot is not confirmation enough for us.

Bottom line - keep mentioning the expected STAR (if that is still preferred by radar) but please don't mention where you think you're parking when vacating the runway.

Just my opinion. Other ATCOs may disagree :ok:

[Rossoneri]

Quite a few of the BA guys aren't checking in with expected STARs anymore. Don't know if it's all just fizzled out, but from my point of view, I'm all for a pilot telling me what STAR he's expecting to fly, regardless of whether they're part of an 'official' agreement with NATS. If every EZY, MON, TCX, TOM, VIR, BAW, BEE, DLH, EIN into a UK airfield with a STAR reported it on first contact, I'd be a fan.

[The Many Tentacles]

I'd say from a personal perspective with regards to BA, it's probably around 50% of the time from the long haul fleet and higher from the short haul.

The other airlines are much the same. It would certainly make my life easier if you all reported it as all I need to do is say "Roger" or give you a direct somewhere

[250 kts]

As far as I'm aware this is still a "trial" about 5 years after it was first introduced. A few more operators were included beyond the initial BAW, BMI and DLH to see if there were any issues with traffic going beyond their clearance limit eg BRASO if holding there on a LAM arrival otr TIGER on a BIG. There was also a requirement from CAA to ensure that this was not happening.

I certainly haven't seen or heard of anyone going beyond the CL. It's really about time it was formalised as stated before. Or binned completely which I think would be a retrograde step.

[Warped Factor]

Seems a bit of a waste of time if inbound to LHR as at least 50% of aircraft approach the inner holds from nowhere near the track of the STAR.

[The Many Tentacles]

It's mainly to cover against RT fail, at least then you've been cleared to the CL and we might have an idea of what the aircraft will do.

[babotika]

We were told to do it when the Olympics came along, and it stuck. Unfortunately we were also told to remind you what airport we're landing at, in my opinion a ridiculous stupid thing to do that wastes some of the R/T we've just tried to save, but that also stuck.

US carriers will call in with their stand (having "checked in" with TC descending to something thousand feet) as in many american airports ATC have nothing to do with stand allocation - it's done by ramp/apron, a completely separate system - and many times won't even know where the pilot is going... It's a bit like British pilots who insist on informing every approach unit everywhere of their aircraft time, ATIS and the QNH when it isn't required.

Unfortunately what to and what not to say is usually hidden deep down in the Jeppesen briefing notes, if any guidance is given at all and gets quickly forgotten. Big bold lettering with simple bullet points about the essentials on page 1 of each booklet wouldn't go amiss.

[10W]

Perhaps the STAR could be something to send to pilots on CPDLC when first entering UK airspace, when CPDLC comes in of course ;)

[Cartman's Twin]

10W - I quite agree. Though I'm in TC so thankfully don't have the 'nause of having to issue a STAR, it sounds like a perfectly sensible addition for datalink. Some would argue it would increase it's useful applications to one....

However the significant issue was illuded to by 250kts. The problem of a crew saying they are 'expecting a WILLO 4C' is that they haven't actually been issued with a clearance and have not read back a clearance limit, which is obviously a compulsory item. The potential problem is then passed down the line as, given no further clarification, perhaps two-thirds of European crews just hold at the inner hold, most of the remainder would (and do) ask for confirmation whether to hold, and [I]some[I] will make up their own approach and toddle off downwind.

So extending this is not entirely without risk, unless proper procedures are agreed with robust SOPs for each airline.

[Rossoneri]

10W - STARS can't be given via CPDLC by AC, at least not in the first iteration of the software. Opportunity missed by the project. Don't know if PC will be able to or not.

[10W]

We won't be able to at PC either in Phase 1 or 2, but if there's a need, then someone at the Project could look in to it.

Or when 'free text' comes in, ATCOs could type it in if workload permits.

[250 kts]

My issue with CPDLC is the significant potential loss of spatial awareness for flight crews. At the moment if a crew is just hearing 8 inbounds being given the STAR they are on then there is a nudge that they may get a delay or that the sector is busy. Do it on CPDLC and that hint,awareness or whatever you want to call it is gone. I suspect the use of CPDLC will be extremely limited or even nada.

[The Many Tentacles]

I can't see myself using it much, as it stands we can only give routings and ask requested levels (if I remember correctly and it was a while ago I did my "training")

Also we're not supposed to use it below Fl195 which negates me asking just about all my traffic their RFL as they're below that when they come to me.

Likewise, we still have to acknowledge any a/c checking in by voice, so why not give them their routing in the same call - like we do now. If it's too busy to give them a routing via voice now, then it will be too busy to hunt through menus and click on things and watch for little indicators on the radar to change colour

[1985]

You can't issue a STAR via CPDLC because its not part if the mandated message set that eurocontrol wants. I'm not sure if its a msg you can even send via CPDLC. Also free text as far as I know won't be coming in as "there is too much scope for it to be misused"....

[ask26]

Due to the speed-based holding depending on the time anticipated in the LHR hold, could this be given by ATC on first contact to assist with vertical planning. To offset against this I currently (A320) assume a worst case of 250kts and request descent from there.

[Spamcan defender]

My issue with CPDLC is the significant potential loss of spatial awareness for flight crews. At the moment if a crew is just hearing 8 inbounds being given the STAR they are on then there is a nudge that they may get a delay or that the sector is busy. Do it on CPDLC and that hint,awareness or whatever you want to call it is gone. I suspect the use of CPDLC will be extremely limited or even nada.

I completely agree for En-route but this wont be a problem for a LONG time in the TMA as CPDLC wont be seen below 195 for a while yet! On my sector we get pilots travelling south out of, say, Manch, who give us the STAR on first contact. I verify against what I have on our whizzy flight data representation but its not really of much concern to my sector as they are being vectored for the majority of the time anyway. I would say that it perhaps becomes more relevant for the inner TC sectors (North+South) with respect to the holding fix!!

Back to CPDLC... I can see some use in it i.e. stuck mic message and a few others. Even at the airports for clearance delivery etc. In a TMA or other dynamic environment the response time mandate is still WAY off for using it tactically. Even a frequency change message would be of little use. Again, I think it would be of good use in En-route but the issue of eroded situational awareness really is something to take into consideration...

Spamcan

[250 kts]

The requirement for the STAR to be confirmed by either the pilot or ATC is purely to confirm the clearance limit in case of RT fail. My understanding of the trial was to ensure that if holding at at an outer fix was taking place that ATC passed that on should the pilot have already stated the STAR eg. "BA123 on a LAM 3A" but holding is taking place at BRASO so does ATC always intervene with the new clearance limit. I'm not aware of any that have gone beyond the correct clearance limit over the 5 year trial.

[Flying Wild]

Has there been anything further on this trial of passing expected STAR on first contact with London.
I did so today (as I do whenever I'm PM coming back to the UK), for the controller to acknowledge with "XZY123, Roger". The Captain then looked at me like I had two heads and said that "we hadn't been given the STAR". I tried explaining about this trial, but he didn't seem to enamoured with the idea...

[zonoma]

Having just read the whole thread again, nothing has changed and the trial is still going on. Enroute holding has happened and I haven't heard of any aircraft going beyond any fix they shouldn't. Probably to do with being told "on reaching "#####", take up the hold" which is quite precise and not really open for much misinterpretation.

I am more than happy for every aircraft on first call to give their expected STAR, a few Ryanair's and even some private flights are catching on, it all makes the job slightly easier.

[Flying Wild]

Would be helpful then if this was put out there again, perhaps by NOTAM?

[Rossoneri]

Personally, if you know the STAR feel free to tell me you're expecting it when you first check in; it's saving RT time especially now it's starting to get busy again. I did a fam flight with MON a few years ago and was trying to persuade the crew to get into the habit.

I'd imagine the original trial (can't believe it's still a 'trial' after so long!) was sent out the initial airline group involved. I think it's worth making it better publicised and certainly open to all, a NOTAM might solve this.

[Hempy]

What a great idea!! Pilots giving themselves clearances!!! Surely we can take this further...maybe 'clearance delivery, Liljet101, expecting clearance direct' Awesome!!! How could it ever go wrong?

[zonoma]

Hempy, hence it being a trial. Which has been going on now for several years. And nothing has gone wrong. Probably to do with all controllers correcting the pilots should they check in with an incorrect STAR. Which has happened. And corrected with no bad results.

[galaxy flyer]

Considering the flights presumably received an airways clearance which was based on the filed flight plan, why can't we just fly the filed STAR. Outside the US, ATCOs seem to delight in keeping the STAR routing a secret. Why is that?

GF

[jmmoric]

STAR's depend on a number of factors, including runway in use and traffic load. Often you'll be put on a STAR to ease the coordination between ACC and APP, and give APP a nice flow of aircrafts following specified paths, seperating them from aircrafts following SID's.

At some point they're taken og the STAR's for vectoring for a nice spacing on the final.

So the STAR's and SID's are there to ease the load on controllers, making them able to handle more traffic.

You'll often see more direct routings for a fix on/or close to the final during hours with less trafficload, or more direct tracks after departure.

So filing a STAR in your flight plan, won't really do any difference to the STAR given (pre-coordinated between ACC and APP/sector and sector).

[zonoma]

jmmoric - in the UK where this procedure is being used, the STAR is exactly the same no matter which runway is in use. The determining factor for which STAR you get is simply which route you are on when you enter UK airspace and are all named according to which holding facility the STAR terminates at. The procedures for leaving the holding facility to approach/land are published seperately.

Galaxy Flyer, in the UK the STARs aren't secret, you will normally be told on first contact with London/Scottish exactly which STAR you are to fly, and unless you have made an airborne route amendment, will be exactly as filed.